Suchergebnisse

PURPOSE: We examined changes in urological care delivery due to COVID-19 in the U.S. based on patient, practice, and local/regional demographic and pandemic response features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed real-world data from the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry collected from electronic health record systems. Data represented 157 outpatient urological practices and 3,165 providers across 48 U.S. states and territories, including 3,297,721 unique patients, 12,488,831 total outpatient visits and 2,194,456 procedures. The primary outcome measure was the number of outpatient visits and procedures performed (inpatient or outpatient) per practice per week, measured from January 2019 to February 2021. RESULTS: We found large (>50%) declines in outpatient visits from March 2020 to April 2020 across patient demographic groups and states, regardless of timing of state stay-at-home orders. Nonurgent outpatient visits decreased more across various nonurgent procedures (49%-59%) than for procedures performed for potentially urgent diagnoses (38%-52%); surgical procedures for nonurgent conditions also decreased more (43%-79%) than those for potentially urgent conditions (43%-53%). African American patients had similar decreases in outpatient visits compared with Asians and Caucasians, but also slower recoveries back to baseline. Medicare-insured patients had the steepest declines (55%), while those on Medicaid and government insurance had the lowest percentage of recovery to baseline (73% and 69%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides real-world evidence on the decline in urological care across demographic groups and practice settings, and demonstrates a differential impact on the utilization of urological health services by demographics and procedure type.

Fundamental questions remain unanswered about the longitudinal impact of blast-plus-impact complex traumatic brain injuries (TBI) from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This prospective, observational study investigated measures of clinical outcome in US military personnel evacuated to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (LRMC) in Germany after such "blast-plus" concussive TBIs. Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended assessments completed 6–12 months after injury indicated a moderate overall disability in 41/47 (87%) blast-plus TBI subjects and a substantial but smaller number (11/18, 61%, p=0.018) of demographically similar US military controls without TBI evacuated for other medical reasons. Cognitive function assessed with a neuropsychological test battery was not different between blast-plus TBI subjects and controls; performance of both groups was generally in the normal range. No subject was found to have focal neurological deficits. However, 29/47 (57%) of blast-plus subjects with TBI met all criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) versus 5/18 (28%) of controls (p=0.014). PTSD was highly associated with overall disability; 31/34 patients with PTSD versus 19/31 patients who did not meet full PTSD criteria had moderate to severe disability (p=0.0003). Symptoms of depression were also more severe in the TBI group (p=0.05), and highly correlated with PTSD severity (r=0.86, p<0.0001). Thus, in summary, high rates of PTSD and depression but not cognitive impairment or focal neurological deficits were observed 6–12 months after concussive blast-plus-impact complex TBI. Overall disability was substantially greater than typically reported in civilian non-blast concussive ("mild") patients with TBI, even with polytrauma. The relationship between these clinical outcomes and specific blast-related aspects of brain injuries versus other combat-related factors remains unknown.

PurposeWe examined changes in urological care delivery due to COVID-19 in the U.S. based on patient, practice, and local/regional demographic and pandemic response features.Materials and methodsWe analyzed real-world data from the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry collected from electronic health record systems. Data represented 157 outpatient urological practices and 3,165 providers across 48 U.S. states and territories, including 3,297,721 unique patients, 12,488,831 total outpatient visits and 2,194,456 procedures. The primary outcome measure was the number of outpatient visits and procedures performed (inpatient or outpatient) per practice per week, measured from January 2019 to February 2021.ResultsWe found large (>50%) declines in outpatient visits from March 2020 to April 2020 across patient demographic groups and states, regardless of timing of state stay-at-home orders. Nonurgent outpatient visits decreased more across various nonurgent procedures (49%-59%) than for procedures performed for potentially urgent diagnoses (38%-52%); surgical procedures for nonurgent conditions also decreased more (43%-79%) than those for potentially urgent conditions (43%-53%). African American patients had similar decreases in outpatient visits compared with Asians and Caucasians, but also slower recoveries back to baseline. Medicare-insured patients had the steepest declines (55%), while those on Medicaid and government insurance had the lowest percentage of recovery to baseline (73% and 69%, respectively).ConclusionsThis study provides real-world evidence on the decline in urological care across demographic groups and practice settings, and demonstrates a differential impact on the utilization of urological health services by demographics and procedure type.

Care during mass casualty events (MCE) has improved during the last 15 years. Military and civilian collaboration has led to partnerships which augment the response to MCE. Much has been written about strategies to deliver care during an MCE, but there is little about how to transition back to normal operations after an event. A panel discussion entitled The Day(s) After: Lessons Learned from Trauma Team Management in the Aftermath of an Unexpected Mass Casualty Event at the 76th Annual American Association for the Surgery of Trauma meeting on September 13, 2017 brought together a cadre of military and civilian surgeons with experience in MCEs. The events described were the First Battle of Mogadishu (1993), the Second Battle of Fallujah (2004), the Bagram Detention Center Rocket Attack (2014), the Boston Marathon Bombing (2013), the Asiana Flight 214 Plane Crash (2013), the Baltimore Riots (2015), and the Orlando Pulse Night Club Shooting (2016). This article focuses on the lessons learned from military and civilian surgeons in the days after MCEs.

Care during mass casualty events (MCE) has improved during the last 15 years. Military and civilian collaboration has led to partnerships which augment the response to MCE. Much has been written about strategies to deliver care during an MCE, but there is little about how to transition back to normal operations after an event. A panel discussion entitled The Day(s) After: Lessons Learned from Trauma Team Management in the Aftermath of an Unexpected Mass Casualty Event at the 76th Annual American Association for the Surgery of Trauma meeting on September 13, 2017 brought together a cadre of military and civilian surgeons with experience in MCEs. The events described were the First Battle of Mogadishu (1993), the Second Battle of Fallujah (2004), the Bagram Detention Center Rocket Attack (2014), the Boston Marathon Bombing (2013), the Asiana Flight 214 Plane Crash (2013), the Baltimore Riots (2015), and the Orlando Pulse Night Club Shooting (2016). This article focuses on the lessons learned from military and civilian surgeons in the days after MCEs.

Care for US military personnel with combat-related concussive traumatic brain injury (TBI) has substantially changed in recent years, yet trends in clinical outcomes remain largely unknown. Our prospective longitudinal studies of US military personnel with concussive TBI from 2008–2013 at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany and twp sites in Afghanistan provided an opportunity to assess for changes in outcomes over time and analyze correlates of overall disability. We enrolled 321 active-duty US military personnel who sustained concussive TBI in theater and 254 military controls. We prospectively assessed clinical outcomes 6–12 months later in 199 with concussive TBI and 148 controls. Global disability, neurobehavioral impairment, depression severity, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) severity were worse in concussive TBI groups in comparison with controls in all cohorts. Global disability primarily reflected a combination of work-related and nonwork-related disability. There was a modest but statistically significant trend toward less PTSD in later cohorts. Specifically, there was a decrease of 5.9 points of 136 possible on the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (−4.3%) per year (95% confidence interval, 2.8–9.0 points, p = 0.0037 linear regression, p = 0.03 including covariates in generalized linear model). No other significant trends in outcomes were found. Global disability was more common in those with TBI, those evacuated from theater, and those with more severe depression and PTSD. Disability was not significantly related to neuropsychological performance, age, education, self-reported sleep deprivation, injury mechanism, or date of enrollment. Thus, across multiple cohorts of US military personnel with combat-related concussion, 6–12 month outcomes have improved only modestly and are often poor. Future focus on early depression and PTSD after concussive TBI appears warranted. Adverse outcomes are incompletely explained, however, and additional studies with prospective collection of data on ...

Esta Guía de Recursos es el resultado de un Instituto de Verano sobre Metodologías para la Justicia en la Vivienda convocado por el Instituto sobre Desigualdad y Democracia de UCLA Luskin como parte de la Red de Justicia en la Vivienda en Ciudades Desiguales, que es apoyada por la Fundación Nacional de Ciencias (BCS 1758774). Celebrado en Los Ángeles en agosto de 2019, el Instituto de Verano reunió a participantes de ciudades de todo el mundo. Al igual que el alcance y el propósito general de la Red de Justicia en las Ciudades Desiguales, creó un terreno compartido de para estudiosos del movimiento y académicos de universidades. Con una insatisfacción a los métodos canónicos que se utilizan en los estudios sobre la vivienda y guiado por los movimientos de justicia de la vivienda que son comunidades de investigación activa, el Instituto de verano se basó en la afirmación de que la metodología es política. La metodología se basa en argumentos sobre el mundo e implica relaciones de poder y conocimiento. El método por sí mismo -ya sea el contra ataque al mapeo o los diarios de la genteno asegura una ética de solidaridad y un propósito de justicia. Tales objetivos requieren metodologías para la liberación. Por lo tanto, como es evidente en esta Guía de Recursos, nuestro esfuerzo pone en primer plano los métodos innovadores que están siendo utilizados por los investigadores en todo el mundo académico y el activismo y sitúa explícitamente tales métodos en una orientación hacia la vivienda la justicia.

This Resource Guide is the outcome of a Summer Institute on Methodologies for Housing Justice convened by the Institute on Inequality and Democracy at UCLA Luskin as part of the Housing Justice in Unequal Cities Network, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (BCS 1758774). Held in Los Angeles in August 2019, the Summer Institute brought together participants from cities around the world. As is the case with the overall scope and purpose of the Housing Justice in Unequal Cities Network, it created a shared terrain of scholarship for movement-based and university-based scholars. Dissatisfied with the canonical methods that are in use in housing studies and guided by housing justice movements that are active research communities, the Summer Institute was premised on the assertion that methodology is political. Methodology is rooted in arguments about the world and involves relations of power and knowledge. The method itself – be it countermapping or people's diaries – does not ensure an ethics of solidarity and a purpose of justice. Such goals require methodologies for liberation. Thus, as is evident in this Resource Guide, our endeavor foregrounds innovative methods that are being used by researchers across academia and activism and explicitly situates such methods in an orientation towards housing justice.